Teaching Pragmatic Competence

2.4 Teaching pragmatic competence

A lot of researchers have the same viewpoint that pragmatic competence is not only grasped through osmosis or exposure. The most problematic for instructors is the way how they deal with the duty of teaching culture, not as if it were skill five to L2 learning but by considering cultural context as principal (original italics) (Kramsch 1993: 13). Thomas (1983: 96) affirms that equipping the learner to state his/her views in the way he/she intends to do so whether diplomatically or impolitely or impolitely is the teachers’ function. The thing we intend to prevent is his/her accidental rudeness or obedience. To put it differently, she believes that learners should be provided with needed information

She proposes a range of approaches to advance pragmatic alertness. Instructors can urge students to consider in which way a certain speech act varies in their own language. This might result in classroom-led deliberations and, for more developed students, gathering facts outside the classroom. Researches paying attention to teaching C and CR as part of students’ pragmatic competence go around Holmes and Brown (1987), who advanced a variety of tasks to make the acquirement of both pragmalinguistic and sociopragmatic competence easy. The purposes of tasks were to identify and create Cs as well as CRs. One of the tasks included students, who accumulated samples of naturally occurring facts so as to increase attentiveness of the context significance as well as topics where they arise. Learners were heartened to gather both spoken as well as written examples, and naturally coming data or from television as well as film data. Barraja-Rohan (2003) talks about samples of Australian English Cs and CRs usually engaging self-deprecation. A task in classroom is illustrated in which learners discuss the aptness of the Cs given after that they inquire the discussions by having

Such teaching help students preserve their own societal identities and take part more perfectly in the target language interacting with more power over both intended force and result of their participations (Giles, Coupland, and Coup land, 1991). For that reason, researchers in the study area of interlanguage pragmatics have placed emphasis on the necessity to assimilate pragmatics in both second and foreign language teaching (Rose and Kasper, 2001; Bardovi-Harlig and Mahan-Taylor, 2003; Martinez-Flor et al., 2003; Alc ◌َ n and Martinez-Flor, 2005; Tatsuki, 2005). Despite the fact that a lot of linguistic experts disagree with thought that competence can be taught; others